This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Hendrix , a case that exemplifies the Gordian knot that is the federal habeas corpus statute. Under Section 2255(h), a prisoner can bring a second or successive petition based only on facts that clearly demonstrate actual innocence or a new rule of constitutionallaw that the Supreme Court has made retroactive.
It particularly disfavors Eighth Amendment litigation attacking familiar lethal injection protocols as “cruel and unusual” punishment. In the past 20 years, the court has announced substantive constitutionallaw, pleading requirements, and timeliness rules that make it harder to win such arguments.
According to the Court majority, when a prisoner pursues state post-conviction DNA testing through the state-provided litigation process, the statute of limitations for a 42 U.S.C. 1983 procedural due process claim begins to run at the end of the state-court litigation. The District Court dismissed Reed’s complaint.
One concern was that the statute states that the court should not, and might not even have the power to, pull such an asset back into the estate. When Brunstad argued that the statue was clear enough, Gorsuch interjected that “we normally require magic words like ‘no jurisdiction,’” something this statute lacks.
Accordingly, the Court interpreted the FSIA as it does other statutes affecting international relations: to avoid, where possible, “producing friction in our relations with [other] nations and leading some to reciprocate by granting their courts permission to embroil the United States in expensive and difficult litigation.”
Then—nearly eight months after Morgan filed the lawsuit— Sundance moved to stay the litigation and compel arbitration under the FAA. In response, Morgan argued that Sundance had waived its right to arbitrate by litigating for so long. But a court may not devise novel rules to favor arbitration over litigation.”. “If
In her opinion, Justice Sotomayor explained that administrative review schemes commonly require parties to give the agency an opportunity to address an issue before seeking judicial review of that question, noting that such administrative issue-exhaustion requirements are typically creatures of statute or regulation. Citing Sims v.
In reaching its decision, the Court explained that equitable tolling “effectively extends an otherwise discrete limitations period set by Congress” when a litigant diligently pursues his rights but extraordinary circumstances prevent him from bringing a timely action. It also noted that pursuant to Irwin v.
After a slew of lawsuits against the gun industry on a variety of different claims, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005, giving gun sellers and manufacturers immunity from liability arising out of the criminal misuse of firearms. It failed on both grounds in 2013 before the U.S. In City of New York v.
Supreme Court held that the Quiet Title Act’s statute of limitations is a claim-processing rule rather than a bright-line rule that constrains a court’s jurisdiction. The post SCOTUS Rules Quiet Title Act’s Time Bar Is Claim-Processing Rule appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. In Wilkins v. Fort Bend County v.
Bruen invokes the authority of history but presents a version of the past that is little more than an ideological fantasy, much of it invented by gun-rights advocates and their libertarian allies in the legal academy with the express purpose of bolstering litigation such as Bruen. June, 2022).
The States have asked the justices to stay implementation while litigation continues in the lower courts. Nealy : The cases is set to resolve a circuit split regarding the statute of limitations in copyright infringement cases. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the motions to stay and the States appealed to the Supreme Court.
The first article authored by Dr. El Hadji Samba Ndiaye (Université de Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar) is dedicated to La double nationalité des Africains subsahariens et les conflits de lois en matière de statut personnel (Dual nationality of sub-Saharan Africans and conflicts of law in matters of personal status). Written by Pr.
All this “complexity and uncertainty” would “‘breed[] litigation from a statute that seeks to avoid it.’” The post SCOTUS Clarifies Reach of FAA Exemption for Transportation Workers appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
Two of the cases involve whether litigants must wait for administrative proceedings to conclude before challenging the authority of federal agencies in federal court. The post Justices Consider Making It Easier to Challenge Regulatory Power of Federal Agencies appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
The post Andy Warhol Art Headlines Busy Week for Supreme Court appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter. Goertz : The case will determine whether a death row inmate missed the deadline for seeking DNA testing of crime-scene evidence in a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C.§
Section 2 of the Statute makes it “an offense for a person to perform adult cabaret entertainment,” either “(A) On public property; or (B) in a location where the adult cabaret entertainment could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.” Judge Parker was correct to enjoin the law pending further review.
Individuals are sometimes removed from the No Fly List during ongoing litigation about their placement on that list. ” Paragraph (1) of section 1229(a) requires a single notice document that contains all the information specified in the statute, including the “time and place” of proceedings.
Those politicians publicly thumped their chests about going to the Supreme Court with the law and limiting the Second Amendment precedent; professing absolute confidence, they litigated the law, and, again, the 2nd Circuit supported the dubious statute.
Indeed, to use a litigation term, his opponent could be viewed as “opening the door” to such rebuttal by raising the theme of unity in the aftermath of the controversy when Sharma believes that she helped fuel of a campaign of disunity. General Construction Co. , 269 U.S. General Construction Co. , 269 U.S.
The PTO also stated that it was bound by a 1981 precedent issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, holding that the statute was constitutional. The Court recognized that the case involved two “notoriously tricky” (and potentially conflicting) issues of constitutionallaw.”. Impact of Decision.
Even though Peanut was a pet, he was still considered a wild animal in New York, both by statute and common law. However, Peanut did not appear to have rabies, and the state law allows for quarantine and observation as an alternative to euthanasia in some circumstances.
” Judge Mizelle noted that the law stands in conflict with the Bruen decision. Under this criminal statute, with the proliferation of the federal government comes the diminution of the People’s right to bear arms. 18 U.S.C. § 18 U.S.C. §
That statute expressly allows the commissioner of the New York City Department of Social Services (DSS) to sue to recover costs. It is a cynical effort to impose litigation costs on companies to get them to refuse to accept such contracts. .” Of course, these companies are not transporting people to make them a public charge.
I label this approach as “strict” because my understanding of the Nigerian Supreme Court decisions on this point is that based on constitutionallaw a Nigerian court is confined to matters that arose within its territory, so that one State High Court cannot assume jurisdiction over a matter that occurs within another territory.
Through more than two years of litigation, the Secretary of Kentucky’s Cabinet for Health and Family Services led the state’s legal defense of its law prohibiting abortions in which an unborn child is dismembered while still alive. EMW Women’s Surgical Center, P.S.C.: Please check back for updates as they justices hear oral arguments.
315(e)(2) extend to all grounds that reasonably could have been raised in the IPR petition filed, even though the text of the statute applies estoppel only to grounds that “reasonably could have [been] raised during that inter partes review.” Famed professor of constitutionallaw Erwin Chemerinsky (Berkeley) filed the petition.
To demand “significance” is to add words—and significant words, as it were—to the statute Congress enacted. It is to impose a new requirement on a Title VII claimant, so that the law as applied demands something more of her than the law as written. And there is nothing to otherwise establish an elevated threshold of harm.
The States of Texas and Louisiana claim that the Guidelines contravene two federal statutes that they contend require the arrest of certain noncitizens upon their release from prison ( 8 U.S.C. The Constitution affords federal courts considerable power, but it does not establish ‘government by lawsuit,’” Gorsuch wrote. 1231(a)(2) ).
That, however, is precisely what these litigants are seeking to raise. The categorical rejection of any religious-exemption case runs against the grain of the Constitution as well as federal statutes. States like Maine and New York offer no recognition, let alone accommodation, for religious objections to the Covid vaccine.
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit erred in denying the Kentucky attorney general’s motion to intervene on the commonwealth’s behalf in litigation concerning Kentucky House Bill 454, the state’s controversial abortion law. Although the litigation by that time had proceeded for years, that factor is not dispositive.
8 violates the Constitution. 123 (1908), recognized a narrow exception allowing an action to prevent state officials from enforcing state laws that are contrary to federal law, the traditional exception does not normally permit federal courts to issue injunctions against state-court judges or clerks.
The court used the same rationale of the cakes design to deny Phillips religious claims: “We also reject Masterpiece and Phillips’ argument that the statute punishes them for exercising their religious beliefs because CADA is “applie[d] through the Commission’s purported use of an ‘offensiveness rule.’” Here is the decision: Scardina v.
One of the more interesting legal issues is how the law defines “malice.” Sullivan on defamation to define the element as the statute requires “malice.” However, it is not clear that it will suffice for a law with potential criminal liability and a law with sweeping limits on political speech.
Share Under established constitutionallaw, states may generally not tax or regulate property or operations of the federal government. A 1936 federal law waives federal immunity from state workers’ compensation laws on federal land and projects. This principle is known as intergovernmental immunity. Washington.
On the Title IX issue, the court held that the statute allows schools to provide separate bathrooms on the basis of biological sex. That is exactly what the School Board has done in this case; it has provided separate bathrooms for each of the biological sexes.
One of the critical factors in the litigation was Bostock v. Because RFRA operates as a kind of super statute, displacing the normal operation of other federal laws,” the Court explained, “it might supersede Title VII’s commands in appropriate cases.” The Eighth Circuit rejected the appeal. Clayton County, 140 S.
Newsom cited the kidnapping statute but apparently failed to read it or the underlying cases. While civil litigation is ongoing, the supposedly clear criminal charges have not been brought by Democratic prosecutors clearly motivated to do so. The reason is that these claims are made for cable news, not courts of law.
The District Court determined dismissal appropriate because litigation of the dismissed claims “would require or unjustifiably risk disclosure of secret and classified information.” The post Supreme Court Sides with FBI in State Secrets Privilege Case appeared first on ConstitutionalLaw Reporter.
At its passage, New York officials pounded their chests and promised they were certain of the constitutionality of the law and would litigate it all the way to the Supreme Court. New York leaders had forced costly litigation only to pull the law at the last minute to avoid a likely finding of unconstitutionality.
” She also pressed counsel to distinguish between different types of harms and resources diverted by organizations in a way that might affect their standing in litigation. Her inquiries aim to clarify the laws structure, urging a closer examination of its effects on different groups.
It was clear from the outset that Jackson would not discuss her judicial philosophy on interpreting the Constitution or statutes — the very issue Democratic senators cited in voting against Barrett in 2020. When asked about her judicial philosophy, Jackson responded with a discussion of her “judicial methodology.” Jackson told Sen.
While there are a couple of longer trial decisions, most of Jackson’s record does not clearly establish her interpretative approach to the Constitution or statutes. There are many things I like about Judge Jackson, including her litigation experience, service as a public defender, and years on the trial court.
Not only is there a pending case on the docket of the Court that has long been viewed as a serious threat to Roe , but the White House and the House of Representatives are threatening immediate actions that could also create new challenges for pro-choice litigants. When the court voted for pro-choice litigants, it was deemed “balanced.”
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content